Get recent posts

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and world-scope. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it establishes the 'latest posts' ordering and discloses pagination behavior via 'Pass nextCursor back as `cursor` to page back.' This meaningfully enriches the agent's understanding of call behavior without repeating annotation data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences carry all essential information: the first declares the tool's purpose, the second gives the pagination contract. There is zero filler or redundancy. The most important information is front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the core invocation requirements: source scope and pagination. It doesn't describe the shape of returned posts, but the name and title 'Get recent posts' make that implicit. Given annotations cover the safety profile and schema covers parameter details, the description is sufficiently complete for correct calling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 67%: `source` and `cursor` already have detailed descriptions, while `limit` has none. The description adds only marginal value to parameter meaning—mostly restating cursor and pagination semantics. It does not clarify the `limit` parameter, which remains undocumented beyond its type/default/max/min, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb+resource: 'Latest posts from one author or publication.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and narrows scope to a single source, which helps distinguish it from broader tools like get_feed or search_posts. However, it doesn't explicitly name sibling tools or contrast its behavior, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'from one author or publication' provides clear context for when to use this tool – when you need posts from a known, specific source. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is unambiguous. The pagination instruction adds a clear usage note about handling result sets, so the intended use case is well implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.